WAC edges MWC in final conference ranking

Comments

BYU will gettum next year. BYU has a bright future and will get better and
better and their finances will be far better as an independent.

Otis SpurlockOgden, UT

Jan. 24, 2011 11:02 a.m.

I love the PAC 10 ranking! Second best Conference in the Nation. Truly, a
Conference of Champions!

Go PAC 12! Go BCS! Norm Chow! Go Utes!

YouAreKiddingSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 24, 2011 9:39 a.m.

Don't make too much of the WAC being hire-rated than the MWC at the end of 2010.
Aside from Boise, Nevada was a flash in the pan in 2010 and will not be able to
maintain its momentum w/o Kapernick. Fresno is Fresno and is schizofrenic.
Hawaii is...Hawaii. All in all, the MWC took one step forward and three steps
back in gaining BSU and switching out Nevada, Fresno, and Hawaii for BYU, TCU,
and Utah.

At this point, with Utah moving to the PAC 12 and BYU going
indy/WCC, I could care less about the MWC. With the Mtn's horrible TV contract,
the BSU-led MWC will fade into oblivion in the next five years.

My
only hope is that Hair grows a brain and re-extends an invite to Utah State so
that the disappearing WAC doesn't kill the Aggies. Their backetball program is
top-notch and Anderson has the football team moving in the right direction.

aggie2010Logan, UT

Jan. 23, 2011 6:00 p.m.

@Y GradAny way you slice it, the WAC was better than the MWC in the past
year. The MWC is getting the best teams from the WAC, and therefore *should*
still be in consideration for automatic qualifying status. However, your point
about the BCS being unfair is all too true, and is why I said should instead of
will. If the BCS were fair, we wouldn't even be having the "who's worthy
of automatic qualification" argument. It is exactly why we need a playoff
system.

MiPIowa City, IA

Jan. 23, 2011 8:59 a.m.

Agreed. The best of the WAC was better than the MWC. And SJSU/NM were a wash.

The Big East secured their continued AQ status by bring in TCU.

Still, with Boise State, AFA, Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii in the MWC---I think
it would be reasonable to allow the MWC AQ status, bringing the total to 7
conferences.

Then, you'd award one more spot to "the best of
the rest" (Independents, Sun Belt, C-USA, WAC, and MAC) for a total of 8
teams. Add 4 at-large teams and you'd have a 12 team play-off.

Would
have been something like this, had Boise State and TCU been in their future
conferences this year:

"Utah had left for the PAC 10 long before BYU decided to leave the
MWC."

Actually, Owl is most right on this matter. I heard from
reliable sources that the decision to go independent was made about 5 years ago.
They have what it takes-- the BYUtv in HD, fans nationwide, and a great history
are sufficient. The timing was the issue. When do they leave? So in a way, it
was a knee-jerk reaction to Utah leaving, as it opened a door to do what they
had planned for years.

Duhwest jordan, ut

Jan. 22, 2011 10:40 p.m.

@live hard....so you think that TCU will ever see a BCS game for the next
decade....How much you want to bet that TCU will make the BCS game the first
year in that conference. Why don't you have a look at the history of the Big
East and rethink your though process again. Of course, one must understand
football to understand what that would actually mean. If you think any team in
the Big East is better than TCU then you haven't even watched football since TCU
came to the MWC. Don't look at their MWC record, look at the their NON
Conference record.

AK CougarPalmer, AK

Jan. 22, 2011 9:58 p.m.

Why all the dribble about UofU and BYU leaving their conference? Good for both
teams as the outlook looks bright. Looks bright for most fans of both teams.
For the critics, the brightness is in the glee of predicing their hated teams
final demise. Both fans and critics should be excited.

Only time
will tell if these moves were well done. I personally think so for BYU, U not
so much.

As for AQ status. MWC is likely to gain AQ status and the
Big Easy or ACC lose status. However, the TV markets of the respective
conferences will have to change the rules to keep the TV advertising money
flowing.

Go Cougars. Make some serious waves in the sea of
indepence.

Johnny TriumphAmerican Fork, UT

Jan. 22, 2011 8:41 p.m.

Old news, was on espn.com yesterday.

WAC only beat MWC in the
rankings because the Utes weren't any match for Boise State...

BluCougProvo, UT

Jan. 22, 2011 7:14 p.m.

@ hedgehog

26-3 ring a bell?

LOL

Y Ask YProvo, UT

Jan. 22, 2011 5:55 p.m.

The talk of BYU leaving the MWC was going on before Utah left. Look it up.

Besides, the loss of Utah is of minor significance. The real loss was
the loss of TCU, which was the DIRECT result of BYU bailing. Look that up, too.

Y Grad / Y DadRichland, WA

Jan. 22, 2011 5:38 p.m.

@ Aggie2010

Let's do the math here. BYU was a cupcake at the
beginning, came on strong at the end, but too late to do any good -vs- the
WAC.

Utah got played like a cupcake at the end. Evidence, they are
sooo proud of beating a 7-6 BYU by one at home. On the last play of the
game.

Wyoming... is the posterboy cupcake.

The
historically three top teams of the MWC leave, BSU and the traitors come in, the
MWC becomes the old WAC. You DO still have an up and coming SDSU, but you
traded one set of cupcakes for another, what makes anyone think this conference
in one or two years time will have a better resume than either the WAC or the
MWC has had for the past however many?

And as has been pointed out,
who on earth would start with the assumption that the BCS will be
"fair" in considering admission?

And, sorry, Y ask Y, on
this one, the universe doesn't revolve around the Y. While I will never agree
that independence was a knee-jerk reaction to the U going PAC, obviously the U
started the exodus.

aggie2010Logan, UT

Jan. 22, 2011 4:46 p.m.

RE:DC"Besides, without Utah, TCU or BYU, the MWC just became the WAC,
so why should they gain BCS status?"

Did you read the article?
Even with Utah, TCU, and BYU, the WAC was considered by experts to be a better
football conference last season than the MWC. So if the MWC was being
considered for BCS status, yet the WAC was better, then the new MWC should be
considered even more eligible for the BCS.

OwlSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 22, 2011 3:52 p.m.

Utah left before BYU and as soon as another AQ conference courted TCU they would
have been gone. BYU would not have left the regional competition had Utah
stayed. Once the MWC started to crumble, BYU exercised an option they had
considered for a decade.

fresnogirlFresno, CA

Jan. 22, 2011 3:48 p.m.

What does it matter what the rankings of these two Conferences were this year?
They won't even resemble the same Conferences next year.

spudlydorightMcCammon, Idaho

Jan. 22, 2011 3:41 p.m.

As a BSU fan I certainly wish that they were in an AQ conference. However, with
Utah and TCU gone to AQ conferences BSU's chances of being in the BCS games on a
regular basis have gone up dramatically. As of right now there really isn't
anyone out there to compete with them for the available spot. Unless someone
else steps up and becomes more competitive, like BYU, for instance, I think BSU
could be in almost every year.

Old ball coachSandy, UT

Jan. 22, 2011 3:28 p.m.

To Striker and DC: What excuse are you going to use when Boise beats TCU handly
in Fort Worth and says good ridence to the Frogs!

Fact of the
matter, is the Mountain West loses nothing with the loss of Utah and TCU....BYU
has not done much since the inception of the conference. (Yes, Cougars you were
once the leader of the Old WAC)

I have to agree, the MWC will
eventually get what it deserves....a BCS Bid!

IheartbloodSalt Lake, Utah

Jan. 22, 2011 3:12 p.m.

How sad that you for some reason think that BYUs schedule next year is any
indication of the schedules they will have the next 6. 2012 games scheduled are
Oregon St., Hawaii, Utah, Boise St., Georgia Tech and Notre Dame. Not exactly
fluff there.

hedgehogAnn Arbor, MI

Jan. 22, 2011 2:52 p.m.

"BYU's "new conference" will be the who's who of the college
football world."

More like a who's who???

Utah State
Idaho State Louisiana Tech Idaho New Mexico State Hawaii.

You'd
ber better off playing Bingham High.

How sad. How very, very sad. To
think a few decades ago you thought things were looking up.

DixieAggieSt.George, Utah

Jan. 22, 2011 2:48 p.m.

BYU probably made a good move towards ESPN independence in football, but I don't
see how this will help them come any closer towards the BCS Championship game.
Does independence make one more bowl eligible (honest question, I don't really
know)?

On another note, U. State should switch to the MWC. It's just
a better move all around.

KHHolladay, UT

Jan. 22, 2011 2:44 p.m.

Truth Machine,

Yeah, Utah did struggle a little bit towards the end
of the season. But as BYU fans love to tell everyone, a 10-3 season is a GREAT
season. And didn't that "wounded Wynn" and the Utes beat Heaps and
the cougars this year?

Scoreboard: 17-162 out of 36 out
of 9

P.S. If you really believe that Utah will be battling for the
bottom of the PAC in years to come, where would that put BYU if they were in the
PAC? Below Utah, that's where. You have unconciously just bashed your own
team.

KHHolladay, UT

Jan. 22, 2011 2:39 p.m.

Y ask Y,

Utah had left for the PAC 10 long before BYU decided to
leave the MWC.

Truth MachineSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 22, 2011 2:36 p.m.

Actually, hedgehog, BYU only had a miserable start; the Cougars improved rapidly
and played very well the 2nd half of the season.

Utah, on the other
hand, had a disastrous second half of the season; completely embarrassed in
three games and lucky to the other three.

BYU has Heaps next
season.

Utah has a wounded Wynn.

BYU helped make their new
and old conferences and neither one will ever be as good again now that BYU is
going independent.

BYU's "new conference" will be the who's
who of the college football world.

Enjoy battling Washington State
and Colorado for the PAC 12 basement.

DCAlexandria, VA

Jan. 22, 2011 2:35 p.m.

Dear Y ask Y - I believe Utah left first, then BYU left, then TCU. I don't
think Utah consulted with BYU before they left.

The writer of the
article assumes that the BCS system of choosing conferences is fair. I'm sure
there will be something that comes up to allow the Big East to stay in the BCS
system. Besides, without Utah, TCU or BYU, the MWC just became the WAC, so why
should they gain BCS status?

hedgehogAnn Arbor, MI

Jan. 22, 2011 2:20 p.m.

It didn't help that BYU stunk it up this year. Although most reasonable sports
fan saw it coming; no tds fan would have believed BYU would have lost to USU and
Nevada.

TDS should feel good though; their new conference beat their
old conference.

LOL!

StrikerOmaha, NE

Jan. 22, 2011 2:18 p.m.

Sorry, but the MWC will never gain B_$ status. BYU, Utah, and TCU made that
conference what it was. All that the MWC will be is a newer WAC conference.

Y Ask YProvo, UT

Jan. 22, 2011 1:39 p.m.

I am still extremely disappointed in my Cougars for bailing on the MWC. Had they
stayed, most likely Utah and TCU would have stayed, and the MWC could have been
one of the top conferences in the country!

Ogden AggieOgden, UT

Jan. 22, 2011 1:06 p.m.

Very interesting. Let's hope the MWC decides to go to 12 teams and adds the
Aggies. Football is on the rise, and the Ags would be a great addition to an
already impressive basketball league. Go State!!!